12. The checking of blood alcohol levels of those who died

What was investigated?

The IOPC investigated:

The checking of blood alcohol levels of those who died and survivors, and what influence, if any, any police officer may have had on the Coroner’s/any other person’s decision to do this. 
 

What was found?

• The IOPC found no evidence to indicate that the decision to test blood alcohol levels as part of the post-mortems following the disaster was influenced by the police. Dr Popper consistently stated that it was his decision and believed it was the correct one. Most of the pathologists who conducted the post-mortems said they agreed with the decision. 

• Evidence gathered by the IOPC indicates that blood alcohol testing was not, as the HIP Report suggested, an “unusual” or “exceptional” decision. Official coronial statistics indicate that toxicology testing takes place in around 1 in 5 post-mortems today: by no means a majority, but not rare enough to be deemed exceptional. Blood alcohol was tested in other disasters involving multiple deaths in the era, such as the Herald of Free Enterprise sinking in 1987.

• The IOPC found no obvious clinical reason why ten of those who received hospital treatment after the disaster had their blood alcohol tested. The consultant who authorised blood alcohol testing of survivors stated strongly that he had not been asked by police officers to do this.

• The IOPC has found no evidence that blood alcohol testing was carried out on any other injured patients beyond these ten. 
 

Significant new evidence 

New evidence gathered in investigating this term of reference consisted primarily of statements from Dr Popper and his deputy, six of the ten pathologists who conducted the post-mortems and the toxicologists who conducted the tests. In addition, investigators sought to gain the expert view of other coroners and pathologists on the decision to test blood alcohol levels.

1. On 16 April 1989, the day after the Hillsborough disaster, post-mortem examinations began on all of those who had died. These were carried out at the direction of Dr Popper, to assist in the inquests into the deaths. As part of the post-mortems, blood alcohol levels were tested in all cases—regardless of the age of the individual who died. In the context of allegations from the police and others that a large number of Liverpool supporters had been drinking heavily before the match, this testing has become a source of considerable controversy.
    
2. The HIP Report commented that Dr Popper’s decision to conduct the testing was “an unusual direction” and stated: “The bereaved and survivors considered allegations of drunkenness had been compounded by the decision to take and publish blood alcohol levels, impugning the reputation of those who died.”
    
3. The reference to publishing the blood alcohol levels reflected the fact that each individual’s blood alcohol level was read out at two separate points during the individual inquests. The first time was at the overall start of proceedings, where the names and blood alcohol levels of all those who died were read out together. The second time was at the start of the specific inquest into each individual’s death.
    
4. The HIP Report also showed, for the first time, that the blood alcohol levels of a small number of injured patients had also been tested. It asked why this had been done.
    
5. In light of the questions posed by the HIP Report, SYP referred the issue of blood alcohol testing to the IOPC to investigate. The focus of the investigation was to establish whether there was evidence to indicate that the decision to test the blood alcohol in all the post-mortems was influenced by the police.